Lucas Oil Stadium named 2009 Sports Facility Of The Year
by BigBlueShoe on May 29, 2009 2:24 PM EDT
in Colts News
24 comments
Lucas Oil Stadium opened its door to the public back in September 2008. After a long and somewhat controversial development, which saw arguments both for and against the construction, the stadium quickly became the gem of downtown Indianapolis. All eight games at Lucas Oil Stadium sold out in 2008, and local businesses likely did well as a result despite the worst recession in living memory.
As a result of "The Luke's" successful opening, SportsBusiness Journal and SportsBusiness Daily selected Lucas Oil Stadium as the best sports facility if the year.
The new Lucas Oil Stadium in downtown Indianapolis has been named the 2009 sports facility of the year by the SportsBusiness Journal and SportsBusiness Daily.The publications picked the home of the Indianapolis Colts for the annual award over Fenway Park and TD Banknorth Garden in Boston, Nationals Park in Washington, D.C., and the Wachovia Center in Philadelphia.
With the recent revelation that Indianapolis is the best sports city in all of North America, and with this latest news about Lucas Oil Stadium, is it safe to say that Indianapolis is the sports capital of America? I mean seriously, if Indy is the #1 sports town and has the best sports facility, how can it not be? Oh yeah, and Indianapolis will host the Super Bowl in 2012. And, in case you forgot, the 2010 NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament is hosted in Indy as well.
I'm sure several East Coast blowhards will bemoan that their beloved Fenway Park, or the ridiculous new Yankee Stadium, are the best facilities in sports. Of course, they are wrong, per usual. East coast people seem to think the sports world revolves around them and their little sports parks.
Um, no.
Sports revolves around the state of Indiana. We Hoosiers hope you non-Midwest sports fans enjoy living in our universe. You are now orbiting the sports planet "Indy." Enjoy the ride.
0 recs |
24 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
As someone who lives in Boston and has been to Fenway many times
The history and feel of it are awesome but it can be rough to spend 3 hours in seats that are 90+ years old. I’m a little over 6’0 and I’m often sore after seeing a game there. Lucas Oil was comfortable, had great views from all over, the opening window and roof are awesome and although I was there for the Bears game, I still loved the place.
On a side note, doesn’t Conseco also usually win these types of awards? Conseco is definitely the coolest place I’ve ever been to see a basketball game (including the old Garden here). Again, tradition is awesome but only the first time or two you see a game. After that you really start to notice the facilities.
"If you don't [draft me], I promise you I'll come back and kick your ass for the next 15 years."
by psvirsky on May 29, 2009 4:59 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
I’m not a fan of Fenway (old, parking sucks) and the Garden is no great shakes (parking will cost you $30 minimum, better off taking the MBTA). Aside from being robbed blind, Gillette was very cool from a spectacle sort of feel, especially Victoria’s Secret – I’m not joking.
Blogger at SBNation's Patriots blog, Pats Pulpit
by MaPatsFan on May 29, 2009 6:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
haven't actually been to Gillette
And yeah, you really gotta take the T for both Fenway and the Garden. I’m just about 20 minutes walking from the Garden so that’s nice. I only went to the old Garden as a kid so I don’t remember as much about it.
"If you don't [draft me], I promise you I'll come back and kick your ass for the next 15 years."
by psvirsky on May 29, 2009 9:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not until soccer, baseball and hockey come to town
Can we be the sports capital. We are still the amateur sports capital of the world, but not the sports capital of America.
"I saw a commercial on late night TV, it said,'Forget everything you know about slipcovers.' So I did. And it was a load off my mind. Then the commercial tried to sell me slipcovers, and I didn't know what the hell they were."
-Mitch Hedberg
by Colts Homer on May 29, 2009 6:30 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The Colts, Pacers, and racing capital of the world doesn’t do it for you?
by KingRichard on May 29, 2009 6:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Soccer? Hockey?
Really? The WNBA sports a greater television audience than the NHL. We have a WNBA team. Soccer? Who in the **** gives a **** about soccer? Fine, I know some people do and that’s cool. I enjoy Nascar but some people think its nothing but a bunch of hillbillies turning circles. As far as I’m concerned, though, I think a MLS team in Indianapolis would fail. Indiana doesn’t scream “we love soccer” to me. I could be wrong but I’m confident in my assertion.
The award given to Indianapolis includes sports across the board. Professional sports-wise, we wouldn’t win. Boston would win that hands down, unfortunately.
Boston doesn’t have/host all of the collegiate sports we do regularly, nor do they have the NCAA headquarters. Boston doesn’t have the Indy 500 or Brickyard 400. Now that I think of it, those two events close the professional sports gap considerably.
When I think of professional sports franchises that count when you’re tallying a city’s greatness, I don’t think of the NHL or MLS. I don’t even know who/if Boston has a franchise in either league. If they do, frankly, I don’t care.
There are some exceptions in terms of winning traditions in the NHL I suppose. But again, seriously, the NHL demands little respect from mainstream sports fans. The WNBA has struggled in its own right but if more people tune in to watch the WNBA, the NHL’s seat at the table of city sports ranking is way down the list.
Throw in the Indians, and Victory Field, and you have a heck of a sports city folks.
by bamock on May 29, 2009 6:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, like I’ve been saying for a long time, Boston can’t lay claim to the Patriots alone because 1) The Patriots aren’t located in Boston, they’re located in Foxboro and 2) They’re called the NEW ENGLAND Patriots, which represents the entire northeast of the U.S.
So really, Boston’s only claim to fame is the Celtics and Sox, who have just recently turned the corner from being the lovable losers ever since they lost Babe Ruth. The Bruins have sucked for eons, so they don’t count either.
by KingRichard on May 29, 2009 6:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Congratulations! If I am not mistaken it is connected to the convention centre, right? If so then it will be by far busier than any current stadium in north america.
by Ray Champagne on May 29, 2009 7:04 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
the convention center project is not finished yet
but by the time 2012 rolls around, Lucas Oil & the surrounding areas and convention center will be a very impressive sight to behold
by LBizZLE on May 29, 2009 9:35 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
That is a beautiful stadium
I love that picture you have up there of the city in the background. Can you guys still play fake crowd noise through the speakers in there like you did in RCA?
You guys got the stadium this year, but it looks like Dallas will take over next year with that theme park they just opened.
You have to hate losing more than you love winning.
by Mr MaLoR on May 30, 2009 1:19 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Indy pumped in crowd noise
yeah, and Ray Lewis stabs people to death for pleasure.
by shake n bake on May 30, 2009 1:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Very mature
Didn’t expect that from a guy like you shake.
You have to hate losing more than you love winning.
by Mr MaLoR on May 30, 2009 8:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
one of us isn't getting a joke here
I jokingly compared the two because they are the same kind of mindless repetitive unsupported knocks that people like to throw out to hate on a team they don’t like.
by shake n bake on May 30, 2009 8:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
now I get what was going on
see below
by shake n bake on May 30, 2009 8:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
right
i’m looking forward to seeing any evidence of that. ever.
"If you don't [draft me], I promise you I'll come back and kick your ass for the next 15 years."
by psvirsky on May 30, 2009 3:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
They had a video
Where you could hear a CD skipping in the RCA Dome. I cant believe none of you guys knew this. Ive seen it on NFL Network before.
You have to hate losing more than you love winning.
by Mr MaLoR on May 30, 2009 8:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The network announced it was an issue in their sound truck
by shake n bake on May 30, 2009 8:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
no one actually there heard it
because it was only on the CBS broadcast.
by shake n bake on May 30, 2009 8:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I was there for that game,
and I heard the CBS video in question. That noise was not there in the actual stadium, because 1st, I didn’t hear it, and if it was there, talk about it would have spread like wildfire in the RCA Dome. Everybody would be looking at each other and wondering what that was. Never happened, which is what really ticks me off when people suggest it.
Now a proud annoyance on Stampede Blue, 18to88, Indy Football Report, and Phil B's blog.
Man, I need a life...
Random fact of the week from the empty void that is my mind: I graduate from high school Saturday at 3:00 (at the Pepsi Coliseum no less). I accept all gifts :-)
by Cassieper on May 30, 2009 9:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
it's the nature of misinformation
it takes 2 seconds to throw out a unsupported claim and 100 times longer for someone knowledgeable to explain why the claim is wrong and/or baseless.
and just to head off any suggestions of conspiracy. When you hear a conspiracy theory one of the first things to consider is “how many people have to be involved?” Usually a stadium full is an example used to relate a ridiculously large number for the answer of that question. In a conspiracy here, it starts with a stadium full of people.
by shake n bake on May 30, 2009 9:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
As Mark Twain said
“A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.” And that was before the Internet….
by ctnyc on May 31, 2009 12:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Indy is the sports stadium capital of the world
Lucas Oil Stadium is the best NFL stadium. Conseco Fieldhouse is the best NBA arena. IMS can hold more people than any other stadium ever built by thousands and has more history than most major cities in itself. Hinkle Fieldhouse is the most historic college basketball arena ever. Victory Field is the best minor league ballpark. Anyone who tries to dispute that Indy has the best stadiums in the country is kidding themselves. However, the sports capital of the country should encompass all of the major sports. That’s why I would sadly give it to Boston because of the history with all of their teams in all of their sports along with Fenway being there.
"I saw a commercial on late night TV, it said,'Forget everything you know about slipcovers.' So I did. And it was a load off my mind. Then the commercial tried to sell me slipcovers, and I didn't know what the hell they were."
-Mitch Hedberg
by Colts Homer on May 30, 2009 3:58 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
What about Chicago?
I think the Windy City may have the edge over Boston. Breaking it down:
1) Baseball — Sure the Red Sox have a storied history, but Chicago has two teams with storied histories. I think the Cubs are just about the equivalent of the Sox, including Wrigley being there. They don’t have a recent WS title yet, but that’s been taken care of by the other Chicago team. The White Sox have a pretty long and interesting history themselves (the Black Sox scandal was 90 years ago after all). And unlike Boston, both of Chicago’s baseball teams have stayed (remember the Braves were once Boston’s other team). I think Chicago wins this one.
2) Football — No denying the Pats had a good run for about five years there (and could still add to it). But the Bears are the more storied team in terms of history. They’ve been around longer and, IMO, have more legends associated with them (Halas, Sayers, Butkus, Payton, et al) If you take out the current crop of Pats (which is fair to do with both teams as their legacies are incomplete), who do the Pats have? Steve Grogan? John Hannah? Maybe Tippett? Advantage Chicago.
3) Basketball — Here Boston clearly wins. Chicago is not exactly chopped liver; six championships and arguably the greatest player ever are more than solid credentials, but the Celtics are second to nobody in success and history and great players. Boston gets this one.
4) Hockey — I believe both cities have teams. I’m sure this fact bears some significance to some people.
Conclusion — while it’s by no means a blowout, I think a strong case can be made that Chicago is more of a “sports capital” than Boston. It is in my opinion.
by ctnyc on May 30, 2009 5:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Or for that matter
Why not New York?
Yankees beat Red Sox (and every other MLB team in terms of success, players, and history). Throw in the Mets and their 2 WS wins as a bonus. And don’t forget the baseball Giants and Dodgers, who, although they did leave, have their own storied histories in the city. For example, when people think Jackie Robinson, they think Brooklyn.
Giants have more championships and more history than the Pats. Throw in one SB Jets team as a bonus. And while the NY teams don’t play in NY, the Pats don’t play in Boston.
Celtics beat Knicks, like they beat everybody. But Knicks have history as well.
If you count the Islanders, NY has two hockey teams to Boston’s one. I’m sure that means something.
by ctnyc on May 30, 2009 6:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
